I couldn't agree more. Personally I find CRAN to be a mess. There's no 
organization to it. You can only find something in there by googling. Also 
the documentation of R packages is very spartan...

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 7:49:40 PM UTC+1, Ista Zahn wrote:
>
> As an R user I'm surprised to see CRAN held up as a model to aspire 
> to. There is a _lot_ of overlapping functionality among those 6k 
> packages, making it hard to figure out which one is "best" for a 
> particular purpose. There are also a lot of unfocused packages 
> providing miscellaneous collections of functions, which makes it 
> difficult to understand exactly what the package offers you as a user. 
> As a user things are easier if a) each package has a clearly defined 
> scope (i.e., "does one thing well"), and b) there are not too many 
> similar packages to choose from for any particular task. None of this 
> is to say that julia isn't on the right track in terms of packages, 
> just that I question the wisdom of emulating CRAN in this regard. 
>
> Best, 
> Ista 
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Iain Dunning <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> wrote: 
> > Yes indeed Christoph, a package that doesn't work is a package that 
> might as 
> > well not exist. Fortunately, and fairly uniquely I think, we can 
> quantify to 
> > some extent how many of our packages are working, and the degree to 
> which 
> > they are. 
> > 
> > In my mind the goal now is "grow fast and don't break too many things", 
> and 
> > I think our pace over the last month or so of around 1 package per day 
> is 
> > fantastic, with good stability of packages (i.e. they pass tests). I've 
> also 
> > noticed that packages being registered now are often of a higher quality 
> > than they used to be, in terms of tests and documentation. I talked 
> about 
> > this a bit at JuliaCon, but in some sense NPM and CRAN represent 
> different 
> > ends of a spectrum of possibilities, and it seems like the consensus is 
> more 
> > towards CRAN. So, we're doing good I think. 
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Kevin Squire <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> 
> > wrote: 
> >> 
> >> Additional references: PyPI lists 54212 packages, currently (roughly 
> half 
> >> as many as node) but, CRAN only has 6214. 
> >> 
> >> Cheers, 
> >>    Kevin 
> >> 
> >> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Sean Garborg <[email protected] 
> <javascript:>> 
> >> wrote: 
> >>> 
> >>> You wouldn't like node ;) 
> >>> 
> >>> On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 at 4:29:53 PM UTC-7, Christoph Ortner 
> >>> wrote: 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Great that so many are contributing to Julia, but I would question 
> >>>> whether such a large number of packages will be healthy in the long 
> run. It 
> >>>> will make it very difficult for new users to use Julia effectively. 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Iain Dunning 
> > PhD Candidate / MIT Operations Research Center 
> > http://iaindunning.com  /  http://juliaopt.org 
>

Reply via email to